10-12-04 Agenda Spec/WS PE3~Y' B'e'a°CH
CITY COMMISSION A~m~
SPECIAL/WORKSHOP - TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2004
6:00 P.M. FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM
1993
2001
The City' will furnish appropriate auxilia~ aids and sen:ices where necessary to afford an indi~4dual
with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a sen, ice, program,
or activity conducted by the City. Contact Doug Randolph at 243-7127, 24 hours prior to the
program or activity in order for the City' to reasonably accommodate your request. Adaptive
listening devices are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers.
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
Pursuant to Section 3.12 of the Charter of the City of Delray Beach, Mayor Jeff Perlman, has
instructed me to announce a Special Meeting of the City Commission to be held for the following
purposes:
1. CONTRACT AWARD: Approve contract award to Enco, L.L.C. in the amount of
$218,010.00 for the Beach Lifeguard Towers Phase II, Re-Bid project. Funding is available from
334-6112-572-62.14 (General Construction Fund/Lifeguard Towers).
WORKSHOP AGENDA
1. Pineapple Grove Street Lighting
2. Acquisition of Land for Parks and Senior/Community Center
3. Special Events Policy
4. The National Citizen Survey
5. Proposed City Recognition and Gifts Policy
6. Commission Comments
Please be advised that if a person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Commission with
respect to any matter considered at this meeting, such person will need to ensure that a verbatim
record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. The City' neither
provides nor prepares such record.
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM #~....~,..--o.--~].~. SPECIAL MEETING OF OCTOBER 12, 2004
CONTRACT AWARD/ENCO, LLC
DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2004
This is before the City Commission to approve a Contract Award in the amount of $218,010.00 to
Enco, !.I.C for the construction of four (4) Lifeguard Towers, N-I, S-l, S-2, and S-4, at the municipal
beach (Project Number 2003-045).
Funding is available from 334-6112-572-62.14 (General Construction Fund/Lifeguard Towers).
Recommend approval of the Contract Award with Enco, LLC for the construction of four (4)
Lifeguard Towers at the municipal beach.
S:\City Clerk\agenda memos\Contract Award. Enco LLC.10.12.04
City Of Delray Beach
Department of Environmental Services
M E M 0 R A N D U M
www. mydelraybeach, corn
TO: David Harden~ager
FROM: Victor Majte~y~, Construction Manager
SUBJECT: BEACH LIFEGUARD TOWERS PHASE II, RE-BID (P/N 2003-045)
Commission Agenda Item, Contract Award
DATE: OCTOBER 4, 2004
Attached is an Agenda Request for City Commission to approve award of contract to Enco, LLC,
for the construction of the next four lifeguard towers at the municipal beach. The towers are N-l,
S-1, S-2, and S-4, and will mirror the first two in appearance.
On Thursday, September 29, 2004, the City opened bids for this project. There were only two
bids received; the lowest at $218,010.00 from Enco, LLC, the next at $248,510.00 from Republic
Construction & Development Corporation. A copy of the bid tabulation is attached for your
review.
Staff recommends award of contract to Enco, LLC in the amount of $218,010.00, for the
construction of the Beach Lifeguard Towers, N-'I, S-l, S-2, and S-4, Re-Bid project, P/N 2003-
045. Funding is available from 334-6112-572-62.14, General Construction Fund/ Lifeguard
Towers, after a budget transfer.
CC; Richard Hasko; Director of ESD
Randal Krejcarek; City Engineer
Rafael Ballestero; Dep. Dir. of Construction
Joe Weldon; Director of Parks & Recreation
Rich Connell; Assist. Director of Parks & Recreation
Carolanne Kucmerowski; City Clerk's Office
Agenda File; 10/12/04
File 2003-045(A)
S:~EngAdmin~Projects~2003X2003-045\CONSTRCT~agda memo ENCO 10.12.04.doc
Beach Lifeguard Towers, S-1, S-2, S-4, and N-1
Re-Bid
PIN 2003-045
Bid Tab
Enco, LLC Republic Construction &
Development Corp.
ITEM EST. EXTENDED EXTENDED
DESCRIPTION UNIT UNIT PRICE UNIT PRICE
NO. QTY. TOTAL PRICE TOTAL PRICE
1 Construct Beach Lifeguard Tower, EA 4 $49,000.00 $196,000.00 $55,625.00 $2:22,500.00
complete per plans and specifications.
:2 Demolition and disposal of existing tow EA 4 $3,000.00 $12,000.00 $4,000.00 $16,000.00
3 Contingency Allowance L.S. I $5,000.00 $:5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
4 Grading and Landscape Restoration L.S. I $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00
Allowance
$ Indemnification L.S. I $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00
TOTAL BASE BID $218,010.00 $248,510.00
Beach Lifeguard Towers, S-1, .S-2, S-4, N-l, Re-Bid
PIN 2003-045 Page 1 of I
Agenda Item No.:~'~l
AGENDA REQUEST
DATE: October 4, 2004
Request to be plsced on:
~ Regular Agenda
X Special Agenda
~ Workshop Agenda
When: October 12, 2004
Description of item (who, what, where, how much): Award of contract to the lowest responsive bidder,
Enco, LLC in the amount of $218,010.00 for the construction of four Lifeguard Towers, N-l, S-1, S-2, and
S-4, at the municipal beach, project number 2003-045. The funding for this project will be provided from
the following accounts:
Funding Source Account Number Amount
General Construction Fund/ 334-6112-572-62.14 $218,010.00
Lifeguard Towers.
Total $218,010.00
ORDINANCE/RESOLUTION REQUIRED: YES/NO DRAFT ATTACHED YES/NO
Recommendation: Staff recommends award of contract to Enco, LLC for the construction of four Beach
Lifeguard Towers, ~-:'t~-l, S/2~d S-4, PIN/2.0e-3~5.
Department H eadl/ ~~
Signature: v /O- ~ - O~'
Determination of Consistency with Comprehensive
Plan:
City Attorney Review/Recommendation (if applicable)
Budget Director Review (required on all items involving expenditure of funds):
Funding available YES/NO
Funding alternatives (if applicable)
Account No. & Description See above
Account Balance See -.~
C,, Manager Review: : ~~
Approved for agenda:~/NO
Hold Until: ~ /
Agenda Coordinator Review:
Received:
Placed on Agenda:
Action:
Approved/Disapproved
file 2003-045(A)
S:~EngAdmin~Projects~2003~2003-045\CONSTRCT~agnd rext ENCO 10.12.04.doc
Memo
To: City Commission
/
From: David Harden ~
CC:
Date: October 8, 2004
Re: Pineapple Grove Street Lighting
The Pineapple Grove Board has requested that the type of street light installed on Pineapple
Grove Way be installed on all the streets in Pineapple Grove with the exception of NE 1st
Avenue. Details associated with this request are in the attached memo from Bob Barcinski.
City staff has several concerns about this request:
1. The Pineapple Grove street lights are more expensive than those on Atlantic
Avenue. Why should the City at large pay this extra cost?
2. The Pineapple Grove street light poles cost more to maintain because they have to
be painted periodically.
3. The City will have to maintain a larger spare parts inventory because of the variety of
lights.
4. Because of the precedent set here, other areas of the City may want their own
distinct type of street light poles and fixtures.
Recommendation: I recommend that Pineapple Grove be required to pay the difference in
cost between replacing damaged street light poles with their unique poles and using our
standard poles. This would be in addition to the cost of painting the poles periodically. If
Pineapple Grove is unwilling or unable to pay this cost, then I recommend replacing their
poles with our standard spun concrete pole whenever poles are accidentally destroyed.
Another option might be for the DDA to agree to cover these costs.
:::: MYDELRAYBEACH. COM
City of Delray Beach
Administrative Services Memorandum
TO: David T. Harden, City Manager
FROM: ~obert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Agenda Item City Commission Workshop October 1~, ~O0~}
Street Lighting Request - Pineapple Grove Main Street
DATE: October 8, ~00~
ACTION:
City Commission is requested to review a request received from Robert Currie, Chairman
Pineapple Grove Main Street Board to replicate the type street light on NE 2nd Avenue, on
NE 3rd Avenue and on the cross streets in the Pineapple Grove District and to provide staff
direction.
BACKGROUND:
City policy has been to install our standard concrete type pole in areas where decorative
street lighting is installed. The reason for this has been to reduce overall costs and minimize
inventory carrying charges for different type poles and fixtures.
The concrete type pole was initially planned for the Pineapple Grove project on NE 2nd
Avenue. However the Board at the time wanted to distinguish this area so that it looked
different from the Atlantic Avenue Corridor. We agreed to this requested change with the
understanding that Pineapple Grove Main Street would provide painting maintenance.
This type lighting has been installed on NE 3rd Avenue between NE 2nd Street and NE 3rd
Street as well as ½ block south of NE 2nd Street along the railroad corridor as part of the
Pineapple Grove Village project by the developer. Site plan approval in 2002 specified that
this lighting be consistent with the same type lighting as on Pineapple Grove Way. To my
knowledge these lights have not yet been accepted for maintenance.
Staff has prepared a cost comparison chart for the Pineapple Grove decorative street light and
our standard decorative concrete pole. The major cost difference is in the initial complete
pole costs (capital) and in the arm and fixture replacement costs. Replacement costs for
bulbs, ballasts, and lenses are about the same. We are now using the same bulbs and ballasts
for both type poles. These costs do not include labor. The other main difference between the
decorative metal pole on Pineapple Grove Way and our concrete poles is that the metal pole
requires painting every 7-10 years.
Staff's primary concems with the Pineapple Grove lighting versus the concrete poles are:
1. Initial Capital costs
2. Paining maintenance costs
3. Future labor costs for maintenance as more decorative street lights are added to our
system
4. Inventory carrying costs for different type poles, etc.
Staff is seeking direction on Mr. Currie's request.
RAB/tas
File:u:sweeney/agenda
Doc:Street Lighting Request Pineapple Grove Main Street
'CURRIE ·SOWARDS · AGUILA · ARCHITECT'S
Robert G. Currie, AIA Jess M. Sowards, AIA Jos~ N. Aguila, AIA
September 9, 2004
Mr. David Harden, City Manager
City of Delray Beach SEP ! 3 2004
100 N. W. 1"= Avenue CITY MANAGER
Delray Beach, Florida 33444
Dear Mr. Harden:
It has come to the attention of the Pineapple Grove Mainstreet Board that there is some
ambiguity as to what kinds of street lights we desire in our community. The consensus was
to replicate the arched light now on N.E. 2"4 Avenue for N.E. 3r~ Avenue and the cross
streets. N.E. ,2~Avenue should continue the lights that are now at Old School Square and
Banker's Row. I
Than ks~you r~:~_ntin ued support!
R°bert ~ [ ~'
Chairn~a'~" .... J
Pineapple Grove Mainstreet Design Committee
c: Paul Dorling
Lori Moore
FORMERLY ROBERT G. CURRIE PARTNERSHIP, INC · AIA FLORIDA FIRM OF THE YEAR 2000
134 Northeast First Avenuc· Delray Beach, Florida 33444 · 561-276-4951 · Fax: 561-:243-8184 · AA0002271
w w w.curriearc.corn
.. '". ".,/ ~x N.E. 5TH TERR. __ §TH ST.
WOOD LANE J "~<" "'- ' ' ~ ! : I
~ N.E. 5TH CT.
i-
L A K E J D A R O A D I4TH I I ST_
~,~E T,4C;E: S T
C,H/ 'PCb~
MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BLVD. N~I~- 2ND ST.
N.W. :ST ST. N~"~" ' 1ST ST.
i
ATLANTIC AVENUE
HOUSE
~ PINEAPPLE GROVE MAINSTREET B~NDARY
MelTIO
To: City Commission
David Harden ~
From:
CC:
Date: October 8, 2004
Re: Acquisition of land for Parks and Senior/Community Center
Commission direction is requested regarding which parcels of land we should seek to acquire
with funds from the Parks and Recreation Bond issue. We have in our budget $3,375,000 for
acquiring park land and $900,000 for the SeniodCommunity Center site. The rapid
escalation of land prices since we developed our budget in January of 2002 and the limited
amount of vacant or underutilized and in or adjacent to the City have severely limited our
choices.
Attached you will find a packet of information from the City Attorney on parcels of land we are
considering for both park sites and for the Senior/Community Center Site. I have also
included the text of the Community Enter Needs Assessment.
Recommendation: Mr. Weldon recommends that we acquire the three parcels east of
Bexley Park to expand that facility by adding 11 acres, and that we place the
Senior/Community Center there. The advantage is that the recreational facilities of the park
would supplement those in the building. The disadvantages are that this site is not centrally
located and is not on a public transportation route both of which are recommended by the
Needs Assessment. It is also in the middle of a residential area. I believe that we should
expand Bexley Park by acquiring one or more of the adjacent parcels, but all three will
probably take all our park land acquisition money. I would also recommend placing the
SeniodCommunity Center on one of the parcels on Atlantic Avenue between Congress and
Barwick, or on congress north of Atlantic. Another option is to place the Center and a park on
the land west of Military and not expand Bexley Park. There are also other sites identified in
the report from the City Attomey. Before we spend more money on appraisals and other
work toward acquiring any of these parcels, we would like to have some direction from the
Commission.
[ITY DF DELRrlY BErI[H
CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
TELEPHONE 561/243-7090 · FACSINIILE 561/278-4755
Writer's Dire~ Line: 5fi1/243-7091
DEL~Y B~CH MEMO~NDUM
~'~ DATE: October 7, 2004
~ David T. Harden, Ci~ Manager
FROM: Susan A. Ruby, Ci~ A~orney
SUBJECT: Parks and CommuniW Center Locations/Information
The following sites have been identified as potential sites for parks and/or a
communi~ center. Appraisals have been conducted on these prope~ies.
(1) Parcels 1 and 3 in The Commons, located about one mile west of 1-95.
Parcel 1 fronts on West Atlantic Avenue and contains 1.87 acres. Parcel 3
is located behind Parcel 1 and contains 2.72 acres for a total of 4.59 acres.
In May, the approximate value was $2,100,000. It is zoned for Commercial
Office Use (see attached).
(2) Adjacent to Bexley Park am 3 pmpedies -- 3.03 acres, 3.18 acres and 5.0
acres for a total of 11.21 acres. The appraisal for all three as of May, 2004
is $2,225,000 (aEached photos).
(3) The third Io~tion is west of Milita~ Trail. The ~o frontage parcels contain
7.81 acres total with a May, 2004 appraised value of $2,800,000. The
remaining lands contain a total of 10.5 acres within an appraised value of
$3,825,000 (see a~ached sketch).
(4) Additional pmpedies have also been reviewed (see aEached).
Please schedule this item for a work shop in order to identi~ sites that should be
acquired.
A~achmonts
cc: Joo Woldon, Director of ~arks and Rocroation
~aul ~orlin~, ~lannin~ Diroctor
SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOS
Front view of the subject looking northwest from West Atlantic Avenue.
Front view of the subject property looking north from West Atlantic Avenue.
7
SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOS
View of the southeast corner of the subject
showing the access easement to the adjoining Delray Garden Center.
View looking north from West Atlantic Avenue showing the entrance
to the subject project with the subject in the distance and on the right.
SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOS
View south toward West Atlantic Avenue over the
Pivate road from Parcel 3 with parcel 1 on the left.
View looking north over Parcel 1 at West Atlantic Avnue.
SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOS
View looking northwesterly at the west half of Parcel 3.
View looking east over the front (south) portion of Parcel 1.
10
SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOS
View looking west on West Atlantic Avenue with the subject on the right.
View looking east on West Atlantic Avenue with the subject on the left.
11
AREA MAPS
Subject Property.
12
PI~kT ~
15
Susan Ruby, Esquire, City Attorney
Delray Beach City Attorney's Office
May 14, 2004
File Property Owner/Address Type of Property
Number
210162E R. Malkemens 3.03 Acre Tract of Land
4686 133~d Road South with Residential and
Delray Beach Business Improvements
210162F Maureen Churchill 3.18 Acres of Land Area
4652 133~d Road South, with Residential
Delray Beach Improvements
210162G Joyce A. Will|.q $.0 Acres of Land Area
4594 133~ Road South, with Residential
Delray Beach Improvements
RECEIVED
NAY ~ ~ 2-984
CITY ATTORNEY
nd Palm Beach County Property
Parcel Bot~dar~ Map Scale 1:5520
',0~ Lot nurrl:)er
All Rig
COMPLETE SUMMARY APPRAISAL REPORT
APPRAISAL OF REAL PROPERTY
LOCATED AT:
4652 t33 Road South
A 3.18 Acre Parcel located in Section 12/46142
Delray Beach, FL 33445
FOR:
City of Delmy Beach c/o City Attorney's Office
Attn: Susan Ruby, Esquire
200 NW 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 32~-A-~-
AS OF:
April 14, 2004
BY:
ANDERSON & CARR, INC.
_,;2t sOUTH OLIVE AVENUE
COMPLETE SUMMARY APPRAISAL REPORT
i
APPRAISAL OF REAL PROPERTY
LOCATED AT:
4686 133rd Road South
3.03 Acres Located in 12/46/42
Delray Beach, FL 33445
FOR:
Delray Beach City Attorney's Office,
Attn: Susan Ruby, Esquire
200 NW 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL
AS OF:
April 14, 2004
BY:
ANDERSON & CARR, INC.
521 SOUTH OLIVE AVENUE
WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401
561-833-1661
561-833-0234- FAX
COMPLETE SUMMARY APPRAISAL REPORT
APPRAISAL OF REAL PROPERTY
LOCATED AT:
4594 133rd Read 8outh
Parcel of land in Section 12/46/42, Palm Beach County, Florida
Delray Beach, FL 33436
FOR:
Delray Beach City Attorney's Office
Attn: Susan Ruby, Esquire
200 NW 1st Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 3:~?.~.
AS OF:
April 14, 2004,
BY:
ANDERSON & CARR, INC
521 SOUTH OLIVE AVENUE
WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401
561-833-t 661
561-833-0234 - FAX
Gary R. Nikolits, CFA
Palm Beach County Property Appr:
Property Mapping System
~ '-, .... ';'~i3~ m ii ~ [ ~ :7070
~ i ~g-:',;~ "r;:~-~' ~ ~ ai 1
, ~ :~q I - ~ , - 000(
~ ~:o ;- O00C
,~1 ~
'~"- -'-~ ~ ~" ' - ~O~
/
i
:~i
Legend Palm Beach County Properl
Map Scale 1:4851
l I~arcSt l~°mda*
I ~120 f Lot nun',b~
MILITARY TRAIL & ATLANTIC PROPERTIES
A&C File# .Taxpayer PCN Land Use
240315A & B Mil Atlantic LLC 12-42-46-14-26-000-00107.81 acres land
12-42-46-14-26-0(X)-0020
240315C Tina L. Lunsford 00.42-46-14-00-000-5090.96 acre land
Barbara Backel 00-42-46-14-00-000-51001.45 acres-
· 240315D & F- .,
_ Roger Robbins 0042-46-14-00-000-5110 land & ho, use
.48 acre land &
240315E .De., bemh Opalacz 00-42-46-14-0~000-5101 house ,,
00-42-46-14-00-000-5120
240315G & H Carman & Mindy Leon ..... 1.93 acres land
0042-46-14-00-000-5'130
2403151 Russell & Pamela Warren 00.42-46-14-00-000-5040.91 acres land
00-42-46-14-00-000-5050.96 acres
240315J & K Larry ,& Judil~ Walters 00-42-46-14-00-000-5650land & house
240315L Fmncesco & Jo Ann Stabile00-42-46-14-00-000-5060.96 acres land
240315M Martha Marino. 0,0-42-46-14-00-000-5.070 .96 acres land
Robert Ma~ino 00-42.46-14-00-000-5080
240315N & O Robert J M~rino & Steve 1.89 acres land
Pace 00-42-46-14-00-000-5600
VACANT LAND AVAILABLE WEST OF 1-95
1.) Parcel 56 (7 acres) west of I95 - east side of Congress
across from Delray Oaks - zoned FCC - no site plan -
trees
2.) Parcels 44 (3.90 acres), 45 (1.49 acres) and 47 (3.68
acres) west of I95 - SIRS property - Congress Park office
park - west side of C~ngress south of Atlantic across
canal from golf course - zoned POC
3.) Parcels 38 (2.72 acres) and 40 (1.87 acres) west of I95 -
north side of Atlantic Avenue west of Homewood - zoned
POC - no site plan - backs up to High Point
4.) Parcels 46 (4.23 acres) and 48 (3.85 acres) west of I95 -
Military Trail just south of Atlantic - have approved
site plan from 1999 - 2000 - zoned RM8
5.) Parcel 35 (5.44 acres) west of I95 - Congress Avenue
south of Atlantic - zoned MIC - next to Urdl's - no site
plan
6.) Parcels 28 (3.23 acres) and 62 (4.68 acres) west of I95 -
Depot Avenue off Lake Ida - site plan came in on January
30, 2004 for parcel #28
7.) Parcel 68 (3.71 acres) - park property next to Sinai
Temple
· Parcel 65 (9.62 acres) under construction
· Parcel 43 (5.02 acres) - site plan - second reading for
rezoning came in on February 17, 2004
· Atlantic High School - east of 1-95
UNDERUTILIZED PROPERTY WEST OF 1-95
1.) Alzheimer's Center (5.36 acres) west of I95 - northwest
corner of Lake Ida and Congress - zoned community
facilities - site plan for portion of 11 acres
2.) Parcel 69 (6.49 acres) west of I95 - east side of
Congress south of Lowson - zoned MIC
3.) Former Scotty's property - south side of Atlantic - east
of Military - behind World Bank - 4.62 acres
4.) Bank of America - south side of Atlantic - east of
Military - 4.32 acres
5.) Phar Mor building - Delray Square Shopping Center - used
as Jewish Community Center - 4.41 acres
6.) Delray Garden Center - two parcels - 2.14 acres and 4.07
acres - north side of Atlantic west of Homewood
City of Oelray Beach
Community Center
Needs Assessment
September 2004
PREPARED BY:
[TET~ TECH, INC.
Deimy Beach Community Center Needs Assessment
Table of Contents Page
I Executive Summary ................................................................................ 1
II Purpose and Methodology ...................................................................... 1
III Findings ................................................................................................... 2
A. Proposed Western Community Center ............................................ 2
B. Improvements to Pompey Park ....................................................... 4
IV Recommendations .................................................................................. 5
A. Proposed Western Community Center .............................................. 5
B. Pompey Park ..................................................................................... 7
Appendix A - Ust of Focus Group Meetings and Interviews
Appendix B -Tallied Results
Appendix C - Meeting Reports
September 2004 Table of Contents
Delray Beach Community Center Needs Assessment
I. Executive Summary
In May 2004, the City of Delray Beach contracted Tetra Tech, Inc. to conduct a needs
assessment as part of the City's Parks Bond Program. The purpose of the exercise was
to provide the City with recommendations for the planning and programming of a
proposed Western Community Center and to determine what improvements needed to be
made to existing Pompey Park. For these recommendations, Tetra Tech used a series of
focus group meetings, followed by research.
When asked about types of facilities for the new community center, focus groups
overwhelmingly responded that the City needed a senior center, or a facility that offered a
senior program, for its residents west of 1-95 in Delray Beach. However, the focus groups
also reported that the facility should offer "something for everyone" in order to
successfully serve the City as a whole.
Focus group responses for proposed improvements at Pompey Park centered on
upgrading and expanding the existing facilities because of the age of the facilities and
equipment and because the park is so heavily used by the community. In addition, the
groups were specifically asked about including a police substation at the park to which
they responded affirmatively.
From these meetings with community focus groups, elected officials, and professional
organizations, Tetra Tech drew some conclusions and has made recommendations to the
City that will assist the City in planning and programming for the Western Community
Center and Pompey Park.
I!. Purpose and Methodolocw
The City of Delray Beach has contracted with Tetra Tech, Inc. to prepare a report that
makes recommendations on the proposed Western Community Center, and proposed
improvements/expansion of Pompey Park. Recommendations would be made as a result
of responses gathered from various focus groups, interviews with City officials and
management, and an analysis of existing information and conditions.
In May, 2004, Dekay Beach Parks and Recreation, through their consultant, Tetra Tech,
began to gather information to determine what facilities and programs would be part of
the proposed new Western Community Center and what improvements should be made to
the existing Pompey Park. Tetra Tech conducted nine meetings, including two public
meetings and interviews with Mayor Perlman, four Commissioners, and the City
Manager to gain insight into the needs of Delray Beach residents. A list of the meetings
and interviews with dates are attached as Appendix A.
The participants in this process were asked to candidly describe the types of facilities and
activities they thought should be included in the new Community Center and the
expansion and improvements that should be made to existing Pompey Park. The tallied
September 2004 Page I
Delray Beach Community Center Needs Assessment
i '- results of these interviews and sessions are attached as Appendix B to this report.
Meeting reports are attached as Appendix C.
Tetra Tech planners analyzed the responses to these sessions to identify the responses
that were voiced the most often in order to prepare this report and recommendations.
Although some of the responses were not the same verbatim, a pattern began to emerge
that led to the following conclusions and recommendations.
III. Findinqs
A. Proposed Western Community Center
Tetra Tech used the results of the meetings and interviews to determine the top ten
responses from participants when asked the following question:
"What types of facilities do you think the new Community Center should
include?"
The top ten responses to the above question are as follows:
1. Senior Center/Elderly Programs/Daycare
2. Kitchen facilities
3. Exercise Space and/or equipment
4. Pool
5. Internet access/Computers
6. Meeting rooms/Multi-use space
7. Gym
8. Children's Daycare/facilities
9. Auditorium
10. Picnic facilities
Seven responses tied for 11th place. They include:
1. Transportation to/from center
2. Game room
3. Classes (various)
4. Bright, airy, well-designed space
5. Space designed for specific activities
6. Covered drive for inclement weather
7. Walking path/indoor track
September 2004 Page 2
Deiray Beach Community Center Needs Assessment
Senior Center/Elderly Programs/Daycare
By far the most popular response, participants in the process felt that the elderly/senior
community is not being served in the City. This is supported by the "Elder Ready
Community Report Card for Well Elders, Initial Assessment, November, 2002" study
prepared by the Elder Ready Task Force.
The report stated that, "...there are no domestic violence shelters for elders, and this is
badly needed in our community." Further, "...the nearest elder shelter for domestic
violence is 25 miles away in West Palm Beach and even they are not fully set up to
handle the frail elders needs."
As for Adult Day Care, the report goes on to report, "...there is only one Adult Day Care
center in Dekay Beach and it is run by the Alzheimer's Association...there are other
adult day care centers outside of Delray Beach who in fact do serve our residents."
It should be noted that the majority of the other top ten responses to the question are
facilities and functions that would be needed to support a Senior Center/Daycare.
The City currently provides senior activities at its Veterans Park located on the
Intracoastal Waterway. It includes kitchen facilities, lounging area with television,
library and large meeting room. Exterior grounds consist of lawn bowling courts,
shuffleboard courts, and patio and picnic tables. This park facility is geared towards
seniors/elderly that are still active and healthy.
The City's 2000 census population shows that over a quarter (25.9% or 15, 551, with
total population of 60,020) of the City's population fall into the 65 or older category.
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council populations forecasts show that Palm Beach
County will grow by approximately 64% by the year 2030. (Source: Bureau of
Economic and Business Research, University of Florida Projections of Florida Population
by County, 2002-2030, January 2003, Volume 36, Number 1, Bulletin No. 134.) Delray
Beach has grown at an average of 1.4% over the past five years. Using this current rate
of growth to project future growth, elderly population of the City will continue, although
may slow as the City approaches build out.
The western area of the City also lacks an after school and/or daycare program for
children and youth. A well-designed facility could offer both senior and children's
daycare - an attractive combination for a variety of reasons. The other amenities, such as
pool, kitchen, auditorium, etc., could be shared by both groups.
September 2004 Page
I Delray Beach Community Center Needs Assessment
The second question was:
"What types of activities/programs do you think the new Community Center
should include?"
The top five responses were as follows:
1. Something for all ages/meeting spaces/multi-use space
2. Exercise equipment/Exercise classes
3. Intellectual programs/classes
4. Arts and Crafts program
5. Dancing/Dance classes
Overwhelmingly, the participants in the focus groups thought that the new Western
Community Center should offer 'something for everyone', even if the main function of
the facility is a Senior Center. Ms. Elizabeth Lugo, President of the Mae Volen Senior
Center, suggested that the facility be called simply an "Activity Center" instead of
"Senior Center" so as to attract the 'younger' seniors. Again, participants suggested that
seniors and children be allowed to interact at the Center, although some stressed that
there should be two separate entrances for security and programming purposes.
B. Improvements to Pompey Park
Similarly, Tetra Tech used the results of the meetings and interviews to determine the top
five responses from participants when asked the following question:
"What types of facilities shouM be included and constructed for the Pompey Park
expansion?"
1. More/expandable meeting facilities/rooms
2. Upgrade all equipment (Office, kitchen, playground, etc.)
3. Upgrade auditorium/lighting/sound system
4. Add police substation
The following responses tied for fifth place:
Add more activities for smaller children
· Reading/literacy skills/library
· Fence (replace?)
· Improve/add storage facilities
Currently, Pompey Park encompasses 17.5 acres of land. The facility includes offices,
athletic staff, restrooms, game room, gymnasium with locker rooms and showers,
auditorium with stage, kitchen facilities, indoor basketball court, indoor volleyball, three
parking areas, Little League baseball fields, junior/senior league baseball/multipurpose
field, spectator bleachers/benches at each field, two batting cages, concession stand,
September 2004 Page 4
Delray Beach Community Center Needs Assessment
tennis courts, basketball courts, racquetball courts, playground area, picnic pavilions,
picnic areas with barbeque grills, and swimming and wading pools. A large majority of
comments from participants centered upon upgrading and augmenting existing facilities
"dark .... dated"
and functions. Comments were made that facilities were and . Only two
responses referred to physically expanding the size of the park, except to increase the
number and size of meeting rooms. The word 'upgrade' was used multiple times.
IV. Recommendations
A. Proposed Western Community Center
Recommendation 1: Create within the new facility a Senior Center to serve the
communities west ofi-95 in Delray Beach.
As previously stated, participants in the process suggested a Senior Center be included as
the main function of the proposed new facility. The demographics support this
recommendation, as well as studies akeady conducted in the City.
Recommendation 2: Create a facility and programs that will benefit the overall Delray
Beach community.
At least half of the facility should be considered 'multi-purpose', and be available to
clubs, groups, and functions for residents in the areas west of 1-95 in Delray Beach.
Moreover, the community west of 1-95 should have access to after school programs for
its youth -- not just children, but teens, as well.
Recommendation 3: Take advantage of the opportunity the Parks Bond offers to build
a facility that will serve a growing community, i.~ flexible meeting space, state-of-the-
art security, communications, and technologies. The new facility should be designed to
meet the needs of the community for the next twenty to thirty years.
It is highly recommended that the new facility be designed and built to meet the needs of
the community for the next twenty-thirty years. This includes not only the method of
construction, but the necessary wiring, security features, soundproofing, sound system,
and communication/internet access for its programs and activities.
Recommendation 4: Construct the facility that can serve as a hurricane shelter.
Consider designating the shelter as a special hurricane shelter for the elderly or for
residents that may need special facilities.
Seniors and handicapped citizens that find themselves in the path of a hurricane or other
disaster may need a shelter that offers special facilities to meet their needs. This would
include restrooms fitted with more than one handicapped stall, special shower stalls for
those residents that can no longer stand, and kitchen facilities that could serve those
September 2004 Page 5
Delray Beach Community Center Needs Assessment
seeking shelter for several days at a time. Also important for such a facility would be
hack-up power sources and communication alternatives.
Recommendation 5: .ds space and funding permits, incorporate the following
amenities into the facility: 1. Exercise facilities and equipment; 2. Pool; 3.
Gymnasium/Auditorium; and 4) Picnic/playground facilities.
These recommended amenities are from the overall ranking of the participants in the
focus groups and interviews. The ability to incorporate all of these amenities would be a
function of the size of the site chosen for the facility.
Recommendation 6: Select a site that is most easily accessed by the Commun. ity, i.e. a
site that is served by public transportation, is near other public places such as schools
and shopping, and is more centrally located to the western area of the City.
Because the success of the Senior/Community Center will rely on its accessibility to the
overall westem community, the facility should be sited in an area that is easily accessed
by most of the total population, and specifically for seniors.
Recommendation 7: Plan the facility to be used for a multitude of purposes and for all
age groups.
Participants recommended that the facility offer "something for everyone" and suggested
numerous classes and activities that should be made available at the facility. This
recommendation would make the safety features and sound-proofing of several, if not all,
of the meeting spaces, a necessity.
Recommendation 8: Consider contracting with the Mae Volen Senior Center, In~
professionals to manage and staff the Senior Center portion of the facility.
As part of this focusing process, the President/CEO of the Mae Volen Senior Center was
interviewed at length. The Mae Volen Senior Center, located on Palmetto Park Road in
Boca Raton, is a successful and highly used facility. Instead of "recreating the wheel",
the City could jumpstart this program by contracting with the staff of Mae Volen to serve
the new Senior Center. In addition, Mae Volen targets low income and minority seniors,
a segment of the population that has traditionally been hard to reach. Another plus is the
staff's familiarity with State and Federal funding programs, transportation issues,
advertising venues, and more. Contracting with Mae Volen would allow the City to
quickly get its program for seniors up and running.
I
September 2004 Page 6
Delray Beach Community Center Needs Assessment
B. Pompey Park
Recommendation 1: Expand the existing building(s) at Pompey Park in order to
increase the number and/or size of meeting facilities, office space, and game or multi-
purpose rooms,
The City has already committed to expanding the facilities presently located within
Pompey Park. When asked about the priorities for Pompey Park, an overwhelming
number of participants asked for 'more meeting rooms' and 'soundproof meeting rooms'.
Again, the general feeling from the participants' responses was to take advantage of the
availability of funding to complete improvements to the Park in the capacity .that best
serves the community, regardless of price.
Recommendation 2: Upgrade existing facilities and equipment.
As stated previously, a large majority of the participants stated that the existing facilities
and equipment should be updated as part of the improvements to the Park. Several
participants pointed to the age or the condition of the equipment or amenities, size and
condition of bathrooms and kitchen appliances, to name a few.
Recommendation 3: Expand the facility to include a police substation.
Participants in the process were directly asked to consider a police substation for the
park. Their affn-mative response ranked fourth overall in the focus group survey and
interviews. In fact, no participant discouraged or disagreed with the addition of a police
substation at Pompey Park. However, a predominant opinion expressed was that the
substation should be an actively manned station with continuous police presence.
Otherwise, some respondents questioned the effectiveness of an un-manned substation.
Recommendation 4: I~ith the assistance of Park staff, determine which activi~es need
to be expanded to meet demand, which activities are not well attended or underutilized,
and which activities, that were suggested by participants, are missing from the Park's
programming. Based on this analysis, revise the activity program and schedule for the
Park.
The response from elected officials, as well as from some of the participants in focus
groups, was to continue to survey and analyze existing programs at the park and to figure
out how best to meet the needs and serve the interests of the community. There was also
discussion in regards to advertising activities, posting notices in strategic locations to
target audiences, and to continue to inform the community on Park improvements as the
City moves forward in this process. It may be necessary to continue public forums to
discuss proposed changes and improvements to the Park as the City continues it's
planning and design process.
September 2004 Page 7
Appendix A
List of Focus Group Meetings
and Interviews
I .. Appendix A
List of Interviews and Focus Group Meetings
Commissioner Bob Costin May 7, 2004
Vice Mayor Alberta McCarthy May
10,
2004
Commissioner Patricia Archer May 12, 2004
Mr. David Harden, City Manager May 13, 2004
Mayor Jeff Perlman May 18, 2004
Commissioner Jon Levinson May 19, 2004
Elizabeth Lugo, Mae Volen Senior Center May 25, 2004
Mom's Club of Delray Beach May 25, 2004
Park Staff Workshop May 25, 2004
President & Vice President Youth Council June 3, 2004
Focus Group - Senior Center June 10, 2004
Southwest President's Alliance June 24, 2004
Public Workshop June 28, 2004
33445 Meeting July i, 2004
Public Hearing July 8, 2004
Appendix A Page 1 of 1
City of Delray Beach
Administrative Services Memorandum
TO: David T. Harden, City Manager
FROM: ~obert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Agenda Item City Commission Workshop October 1~, ~O0~
Proposed Revisions - Special Event Policies and Procedures
DATE: October 7, ~00{
ACTION:
City Commission is requested to review proposed revisions to the Special Events Policies
and Procedures and provide staff with direction.
BACKGROUND:
Staff presented revisions to the existing Special Events Policies and Procedures to
Commission at your August 10th Workshop. City Commission had proposed various changes
to the policies and directed staff to obtain input from additional organizations who sponsor
events as well as from the Neighborhood Advisory Council. In addition to various
grammatical changes highlights of the changes as directed are as follows:
1. Addition of language concerning events held at the Tennis Center in paragraph IA.
2. Clarification and re-write of Section III J
3. Changes to the payment schedule for major events
4. Addition of language concerning noise ordinance waivers for Neighborhood Block
Parties Section V
Attached is a draft which includes these changes except for the section dealing with charges
for major events. Attached is a proposal for two (2) options for these changes.
The options along with the revisions were sent to William Wood, Marjorie Ferrer, Joe Gillie,
Nancy Stewart, Ed Gallagher, Janie Ramirez, and Elizabeth Wesley. Comments and
suggested changes were received from Nancy Stewart and Marjorie Ferrer. Joe Gillie and
William Wood verbally indicated they had no suggested changes.
The NAC reviewed the proposed policies and procedures at their September meeting and it
was reported to me that they had no recommendations for changes.
I have attached comments received from Ms. Ferrer and Ms. Stewart. Marjorie had no
recommended changes to the policies but recommended option 2 for charges for major
events. Ms. Stewart also recommended option 2 as well as additional changes. I have
reviewed her recommendations and have no objections to them.
Also attached is a new chart that compares charges under the existing event policy versus the
proposed option 2 for major events. No changes were proposed for intermediate or minor
events.
Staff is seeking additional direction and guidance.
RAB/tas
File:u:sweeney/agenda
Doc:Special Event Policies and Procedures
SPECIAL EVENTS
POLICIES & PROCEDURES
I. Definitions
A) Special Event - A special event is a non-routine happening or social
activity bringing a large number of people together in a defined area on
City facilities, right of way, or private property which requires City services
to ensure safety and coordination. Special events include activities such
as festivals, concerts, sporting events, parades, walks and runs, etc. This
definition does not apply to events held at the Tennis Center, which
require a separate contract.
~ , ~,~v~v v, v~v ~, ,, ''
I1. Types of Even~
A} Major Event - An even~ of one or more day duration with a cost of over
$10,000 for City se~ices, staff ovedime and equipment use.
B} Int~rmodiat~ fiv~nt - An ovent of OhO or more day duration with a cost of
be~een $~,000 and $~0,000 for City se~ices, staff ovodime, and
equipment uso.
~inor fiwnt - An ovent of one day or less duration, with a cost of under
$~ ,000 for Gity so,ices, staff ovedimo and use of oquipment.
III. G~n~ral ~oli~i~
~, ~, , ,~,~, ........ ,~ ..........
~ ~ Event sponsors are required to obtain all Ci~, State, County and Health
Depadmont pormits, licensos and/or inspections as may be neodod.
~ ~ fivent sponsors are responsible for submittin~ in writin~ permission as
may bo required from other ~ovornmental a~oncios, private prope~y
owners, and designated manaoers of Gity propody ~ includinfl ~
~ Old School Square.
~ Event sponsors are pdmadly rosponsible for event promotion, marketin~
and adve~isin~. City assistance may be providod through its ~ublic
In[ormation Offi~r wob paso and othor pdntod publications.
1
File:u:sweeney/ovents
Doc:Special Event Policy and Procedure
8/30~004
F-)D Only one major event will be allowed per month, unless otherwise
approved by City Commission.
G-) E A major and intermediate event will not be allowed on the same day or
during the same week.
FI-) FNo more than two (2) intermediate events will be allowed within the same
week when total costs exceed $10,000.
1-) G__ City staff will assist in obtaining parking lot use agreements from the
County and CRA as may be needed.
J-)H Event sponsors or their contractors are required to submit required
certificates of insurance, to include liquor liability when applicable, hold
harmless agreements, and any required cash bonds to the City at least
one week before the event.
K-) I Submittal Requirement:
· Major Event- Initial requests must be submitted to the City
Manager or his designee at least 90 days prior to the event. The
permit application including all back up material must be
submitted at least 60 days before the event.
· Intermediate Event- Initial requests__must be submitted to the
City Manager or his designee at least 60 days before the event.
The permit application including all back up material submitted no
later than 45 days prior to the event.
· Minor Event - Initial ~ requests must be submitted to
the City Manager or his designee at least 45 days prior to the
event. The permit application and all back up materials must be
submitted at least 30 days prior to the event.
· Request for a new event must be submitted in writing at least 90
days before the event.
· Event submittals may require (based on the type and the size of
the event)
· Site plan
· Parking plan
· Traffic plan
· Private security plan
· Alcohol control plan
· Police security plan
· Pyrotechnic permit submittals shall be submitted to the Fire-
Rescue Department at least 30 days prior to the scheduled
display.
· Maintenance/clean up plan
· City staff wi!! may provide assistance in developing said plans.
· Entertainment schedule
· Load in and take down schedule
· Event Sponsors will be required to submit an event budget.
2
Filc:u:swccncy/cvents
Doc:Special £vcnt Policy and Procedure
8/30/2004
All events shall be subiect to compliance with Chapter 99 of the City's
Code of Ordinances entitled "Noise Control."
L-) J Event staffin~
Police .... "~*'"'-, police or other trained non-sworn personnel may be
required
r~;r~*;~. ~r'~-'l;;~ ~r ~r;~ ~,
at the discretion of the Chief of Police or bis/~er desiRnee based upon
proiected attendance numbers, type of event1 traffic/pedestrian concerns,
~eo~raphic location and site layout.
· Mandatow police personnel are required for events where alcohol
is se~ed or sold by the event sponsor, event vendor, or other
businesses within the event foot print.
thc ~;*" ~
Fire - mandato~ sta~ng may be required as determined by the Fire Chief
in consultation with the City Manager or his designee normally when the
total estimated crowd at anyone time in the venue area exceeds 2,500
people. However, staffing requirements must take into account venue
risks, type of activity, and other safe~ considerations in addition to the
size of the event.
~,~, ....
If the Police/Fire Depa~ment determines that there is no undue risk to
public safety, then Police/Fire staffing of the event is not necessaw.
~ K Minor events will be approved or disapproved at the staff level; all other
events will be approved by the CiW Commission.
IV. Event Payment for Ci~ Se~ices
3
Filc:u:swccncy/cYcnts
Doc:Special B~cnt Policy and Procedure
813012004
1. Event sponsors will be required to pay for costs incurred by the City per
the following schedule. For purposes of this section costs are defined as
City staff overtime costs, stage use and set up costs, barricade rental
charges and costs for signage. Non-profit and charitable organizations
are defined as those with a 501c(3), c(4), e¢ c(6), c(10) and c(19)
designation. All other sponsors not designated as by the City e¢ a_.~s non-
profit/charitable will be considered as private sponsors. In order to be
considered as a non-profit under one of the categories above, the event
sponsor must have the IRS designation by the time of the event.
A) City sponsored or co-sponsored event- No charges for City
costs.
B) Privately Sponsored Events - Event payment schedule will take
effect as of date of approval of these policies. Years calculated are
based on inception date of the event.
Minor Event ....... , ,,~ r-;~, ...... .',~,~ ~,,. .,it .... ; .... ~,~ .... ~; ......; .... ~
100% payment of all costs.
Intermediate Event
· Years 1-2 50% payment of costs over $1,000
· After year 2 payment of 100% of costs
Major Event
· Year 1-2 50% payment of total cost
· Year 3 60% payment of total cost
· Year 4 -,5 75% payment of total cost
· After Year 5 100% payment of all costs
and after
C) Non-Profit/Charitable Organization Sponsor Events
Minor Event
· Years 1-2 no charges
· Years 3-5 50% of cost
· After year 5 100% of cost
Intermediate Event (91,000 - ~10~000)
· Years 1-2 no charges
4
Filc:u:swecncy/cvcnts
Doc:Special Evcnt Policy and Proccdurc
8/30/2004
no charge first $11000; 20% for amount over
$1,000
m~; r~nn no
· After year 5 Fi..., ,~,; nnn no "~'°'"'" ~no/_ ~ .... ~ .....* ov~' ~,~ ~
charge first $1,000; 40% for amount over
$1,000
Major Event (over $10,000)
· Years 1-2 no charges
· Years 3-5 ~;-:* ¢~n nnn no charge, ~ ........ ~ ...........
$!0,000 first $5,000; 40% charge for costs
over $5,000
· After year 5 first $1n~,~.nnn no charge, 75% -~, ~"~.,.,u~ .... ~-.~, ---*-~.~ o"e-. .
~ first $5,000; 60% charge for costs
over $5,000
D) Permit Fees
Event processing permit fees will be charged as follows:
· Minor event $50.00
· Intermediate Event $100.00
· Major Event $200.00
Above payment structure does not include charges that may be contracted for use of
Old School Square or Tennis Center. Charges specified in contracts for these sites
may be different from and/or in addition to the above schedule.
Additional charges will be made for stage rental and barricade rental. Barricade rental
charges will be levied when the City is required to rent additional barricades. Event
sponsors are responsible for all costs for po~olet rentals, barricade rentals from private
companies, area ightinR rentals, tent1 table, chair rentals and any other costs for
equipment or supplies that the City does not have for use.
V. Neighborhood Block Pa~ies
~ Permit applications for neighborhood block paKies will be reviewed ~
.~.~.~,~ ~,.-- a ~.~---- ~ ~ ....... ~_~. ~--;-~.~,~ by the City Manager or his designee.
Consideration of approval will be based upon the following policies:
· ~ Permit applications must be received in writing by the City
Manager's Office at least ~ 21 days prior to the event.
· ~ Permit applications must be submitted by the Homeowners
Association or where there is no Homeowners Association ~ by other
individuals with a petition signed by 51% of the homeowners who live
on the block.
· Approvals will only be given for a one (1) block area.
5
Fi lc:u:swccncy/cvcnts
Doc:Special Event Policy and Procedure
8/30/2004
· Consumption or sale of alcohol on City rights-of-way will not be
permitted.
· Structures other than barricades are not allowed in the City rights-of-
way.
· Homeowners Association will be required to pay all overtime costs that
may be incurred.
· Impacts due to other events will be considered in approval process.
· Applications will not be approved for any activity past 10 p.m.
· Approvals will not be given for individual homeowner sponsored parties
or events.
· Must comply with provisions of Chapter 99 of the Cities Code of
Ordinances entitled "Noise Control".
VI. Permit denials may be appealed to the City Manager within twenty {20) days
of the denial except for neighborhood block parties which may be appealed
within five (5) days of the denial. The City Manager must render a written
decision within five {5) business days thereafter for all events except for
neighborhood block parties which shall require a written decision within
two {2) business days. If the City Manager upholds the permit denial for an
event, regardless of classification, then the applicant may appeal the City
Manager's decision to the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County within thirty
(30) days,
A) Grounds for Denial of Permit
Permit applications shall be reviewed by the Assistant City Manager or
his/her designee within thirty (30) days of submission of the permit
application. Permits may be denied for any of the following reasons:
· The application for permit (including any required attachments
and submissions) is not fully completed and executed;
· The applicant has not tendered the required application fee with
the application or has not tendered the required user fee,
indemnification agreement, insurance certificate, or security
deposit within the times prescribed by the Assistant City Manager
or his/her designee;
· The application for permit contains a material falsehood or
misrepresentation;
· The applicant is legally incompetent to contract or to sue and be
sued;
· The applicant or person on whose behalf the application for
permit was made has on prior occasions damaged municipal
property within the City of Delray Beach and has not paid in full
for such damage, or has other outstanding and unpaid debts to
the City of Delray Beach;
· A fully executed prior application for permit for the same time and
place has been received1 and a permit has been or will be granted
Fil¢:u:swccncy/cvcnts
Doc:Special Event Policy and Procedure
8/30/2004
to a prior applicant authorizing uses or activities which do not
reasonably permit multiple occupancy of the particular municipal
property or part hereof;
· The use or activity intended by the applicant would conflict with
previously planned programs organized and conducted by the
City of Delray Beach and previously scheduled for the same time
and place;
· The proposed use or activity intended by the applicant would
present an unreasonable danger to the health or safety of the
applicant, or other users of the park, of City Employees or of the
public;
· The applicant has not complied or cannot comply with applicable
licensure requirements, ordinances or regulations of the City
concerning the sale or offering of any goods or services;
· The use or activity intended by the applicant is prohibited by law,
by the City's Code of Ordinances or by these regulations.
· The applicant has demonstrated unsatisfactory performance in
the past.
File:u:sweeney/evcnts
Doc:Special Event Policy and Procedure
8/30/2004
OPTIONS
CHANGES TO CHARGES
FOR MAJOR EVENTS
Option #1 Major Event
3-5 years First $1,000 exempt, then 30% of balance
After year 5 First $1,000 exempt, then 65% of balance
Option #2 Major Event
3-5 years First $1,000 exempt, then 30% of balance
After year 5
$10,000 - $19,999 First $1,000 exempt, then 35% of balance
$20,000 - $29,999 First $1,000 exempt, then 40% of balance
$30,000 - $39,999 First $1,000 exempt, then 50% of balance
$40,000 - $49,999 First $1,000 exempt, then 60% of balance
over $50,000 First $1,000 exempt, then 65% of balance
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0
0 ~ 0 0
· Types of Tax-Exempt Organizations Page 1 of 1
Internal Revenue Service IRS.gov
Charities & Non-Profits
Types of Tax-Exempt Organizations OITy
Tax lnfo~ation for Chari~ble Omani~fions
Tax information for ~aritable, religio~s, scientific, literal, and other organizations exempt
under Internal Revenue Code ("IRC") se~ion 501(c)(3).
~Tax Information for Social Welfare Or~ani~tions
Tax information for civic leagues, commun~ organizations, and other sodal welfare
organizations exempt under IRC section 501(c)(4).
Tax Info~ation for Labor and Aqricultuml Organizations
Tax information for labor and agricultural organizations exempt under IRC se~ion 501(c)(5).
~Tax Info~ation for Business Leagues
Tax info~ation for trade assodations, chambers of ~mmerce, real estate boards, and other
business leagues exempt under IRC se~ion 501(c)(6).
Tax Info~ation for Social Clubs
Tax information for hobby clubs, ~unt~ clubs, and other organizations foxed for sodal and
recreational put.sas, which are exempt under IRC se~ion 501(c)(~.
Tax I~formation for Fraternal Societies
Tax information for lodges and similar orders and assodations exempt under IRC section 501
(c)(S) or 501(c)(10).
~Tax Information for Veterans' Or~ani~tions
Tax information for veterans' organizations, primarily those exempt under IRC se~ion 501(c)
(19).
Tax Information for Employee Associations
Tax information for Io~1 associations for employees exempt under IRC se~ion 501(c)(4),
volunta~ employees beneflcia~ associations exempt under IRC se~ion 501(c)(9), and
supplemental unemployment benefit trusts exempt under IRC se~ion 501(c)(17).
Tax Info~ation for Political Organizations
Tax Info~ation for pol~i~l pa~ies and ~mpaign ~mmittees subject to tax under IRC se~ion
527.
~ Tax Information for Other Tax-Exemot Organizations
Miscellaneous ~pes of organizations t~at quali~ for exemption from federal income tax.
http://www.irs.gov/charities/contenffO,,id=96931,00.html 6/23/2004
£1T¥ OF DELRI:I¥ BER£H
DELRAY BEACH
~ 100 N.W. 1st AVENUE · DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444. 561/243-7000
AIl-~ericaCib
'lll
2001 Ms. Marjorie Ferrer
Delray Beach Joint Venture [
64 SE 5t~ Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33483
Re: Proposed Revisions - City of Delray Beach Special Event Policies and
Procedures
Dear Marjorie:
At their workshop on August l0th City Commission directed that the proposed revisions
to the City's Special Event Policies and Procedures be sent to various event sponsors for
review and comment.
Attached is the draft with some revisions made based on Commission comments. I still
have to develop different options for charges for City services for major events.
Please review the attached and provide me with your comments and/or suogeo~ibns for
changes by August 30th.
Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Robert A. Barcinski
Assistant City Manager
RAB/tas
File:u:sweeney/events
Doc: Ltr to Sponsors re Policies and Procedures
THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS
OPTIONS
CHANGES TO CHARGES
FOR MAJOR EVENTS
Option #1 MajorEvent
3-5 years First $1,000 exempt, then 30 % of balance
After year 5 First $1,000 exempt, then 65% of balance
2 Major Event e~
First $1,000 exempt, then 30% of balance
After year 5
~ $10,000 - $19,999 First $1,000 exempt, th
~ $20,000 - $29,999 First $1,000 exempt, then 40% of balance
~ $30,000 - $39,999 First $1,000 exempt, then 50% of balance
~, $40,000 - $49,999 First $1,000 exempt, then 60% of balance
50,000 First $1,000 exempt, then 65 %~
August 25, 2004
MR. BOB BARCINSKI R i~ C ~ !V E D
City of Delra_,y Beach
100 N.W. 1" Avenue
Delray Beach, FL 33~??.
C!T'Y i'v~ANAGER ARTS, INC.
REF: Proposed Revisions- City of Delray Beach Special Event Policies and Procedures
Dear Bob,
Thank you for providing me the opportunity to review and provide input to the proposed
revisions for the city's event policies and procedures. I am basically in agreement with
proposed changes and understand the city's position. Overall the new revisions seem fair
and appropriate. My comments are:
1) First and foremost, I feel strongly that if the city is adopting "Event Policies' that ALL
events must be forced to abide by the policy and procedures. For events that aren't
in compliance, permission should not be granted the following year.
On page 61 item A it is stated that any person or applicant who damaged city
property and not paid for damage; not paid application fee; etc. that it is grounds for
denial. I feel strongly that it should dearly state something that ensures rental fee,
tech fees and city staff fees must be paid also. It is not fair those events that have
bad luck, bad weather or are just unsuccessful that they can receive relief and
assistance from the city. It provides a 'crutch' for them. Our event has requested
funding from the city on numerous occasions and continues to get denied.
2) OPTIONS for Major Events:
I select option TWO. It provides events ~breathing room" regarding budgetary
expenses.
3) PAGE 2 1 ITEM I:
Under Major, Intermediate,and Minor Events, I feel that you should also add that
"Application Fee" is due with initial requests.
4) Page 41 ITEM C:
I suggest that a notation be mede clarifying that event breakdowns are based on
year of inception - NOT at time they become a non-profit organization. (That was
confusing to us. When the event policy changes we decided to become non-profit to
save us on city expenses. This will avoid confusion/misunderstanding.) Delray Beach
Arts, inc.
5) TENNIS CENTER:
I really don't have a specific recommendation other than the fact that 'something'
should be outlined regarding policy and procedure of conducting events at the
10 S.E, ist Avenue
tennis center. Currently the understanding is that the Tennis Center does not fall
under these policies. Second Floor
6) I feel that any events who have already received approval should not be forced to Delray Beach
comply if the event is after Oct. 1'~. FL 33444
Sincerely,
._..... Sponsor info
~/'~ ~'1 ~ Tel: (561) 274-4663
Vendors & General info
Nancy Stewart Tel: (561) 279-0907
Executive Director
Fax: (561)274-6129
www.db§arlicfest.com
To: City Commission
From: David Harden
CC:
Date: October 8, 2004
Re: National Citizen Survey
A number of cities use citizen surveys to evaluate the effectiveness of their City services. In
view of this fact, ICMA has partnered with the National Research Center, Inc. to create the
National Citizen Survey. I wanted to bring this to your attention to see if you might have an
interest in doing this type of survey.
We have done surveys for individual departments in the past, primarily the Police
Department, but it has been several years since we did that. The attached flyer describes in
detail the services offered. This is not a budgeted item, but could be funded from the
Manager's Contingency account. Commission direction is requested.
September 20, 2004
Vol. 85, No. 19
I~laVllL E T T E RI Supplement No. I
Good government listens
The National Citizen Surve
--.~ NATIONAL
"The value for the cost is
really incredible."
SURVEY
When Budgets Are Tight...
Why should you spend money for a citizen survey? EiirOi!
Because when resources are scarce, you have to
set priorities.
And to find out what your citizens' priorities are, you To join the next group of local governments
· conducting The National Citizen SurveyTM,
~.~ need a survey.
Participants in The National Citizen Surve? have found · Fax or mail the form on the back to NCS,
this turnkey citizen survey service to be the most economi- 202-962-3500; ICMA, 777 North Capitol St.,
cai and effective way to determine where budgets can be NE, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20002-4201
cut, where more resources are needed, and which functions · For more information, e-mail ntm@icma.org.
of the local government are performing well. The NCSTMis Surveys begin monthly!
often easier and less expensive than an in-house survey or a
consultant surve,~; and the results are reliable, professional, Read about The NCSTM at icma.org/ncs~you'll~!
and useful to staffand elected officials alike, find prices, schedules, a slide-show presentation
about The NCS'", and morel
Why Is The NCS' Cost Effective? ............... .~:-.
ICMA partnered with National Research Center, Inc., a
What Is Included?
professional survey organization with a national reputa-
tion, to develop and test a survey template that combines One low fee for The NCSTM Basic Service gives you
standard and customized questions. By conducting several · Customized survey form plus up to three
surveys simultaneously, we keep administrative costs to a optional questions
minimum. As a result, The National Citizen SurveyTM · Customized letter
offers an extremely professional service at a fraction of the · Three mailings to 1,200 randomly selected households
cost of most consultant surveys. Better yet, by aggregating · A margin of error (95 percent confidence interval) of
results from many local surveys into one database, The no more than +/- 5 percentage points
National Citizen Survey~' provides you with norms · Data input and cleaning
against which to compare your own results. · Data weighting to reflect population norms
Your individual results are never shared with other gov- · Three reports: executive summa~,, statistical analysis
~-- ernments without your permission, but aggregated results of survey results, optional comparison with national
create a powerful tool for assessing your services, norms, all in electronic format
· Certificate of participation What Do Participants Say About The NC$?
· Technical assistance by phone and e-mail The NCS': gets top marks for
Also available: larger mailings, Spanish-language version Ease of implementation
of survey, addition of open-ended questions, comparison · "We've done it for two years--went even more
to customized norms, demographic and geographic cross- smoothly than last year. No problems whatsoever."
tabulation, phone survey, presentation of results to elected · "About as painless as it could possibly be for us--they
officials and more! The NCS" was designed to comple- did a super job."
ment the work of ICMA's Center for Performance Price
Measurement. The results of your NCS survey can be ° "Staff time is reduced and the built-in efficiencies
used as performance measures for CPM purposes, make The NCS very affordable."
· "If the NCS hadn't been available, we couldn't have
What Makes The NCS' a Credible Survey? conducted a survey."
The final reports created by National Research Center, Inc., Value
are professional, objective, and written for the lay reader. · "Extremely useful--council refers to it a lot!"
Some participants share them with citizens and businesses ° "Staff were pleased to get ra~v data and reports that
by posting them on the local government Web site. were well done."
Feedback from the pilot tests, focus groups, and NCSTM · "We have incorporated the data into the budget, for
participants has been incorporated into The NCSTM to performance measures needing the survey results."
ensure that your local government receives the best infor- · "You have to be sure you're focused on what citizens
marion possible per dollar spent on your survey, want to focus on."
__ Y~S, my jurisdiction would like to participate in ICMA's National Citizen Surve?:
Please send materials necessary to start the survey process and invoice me for $4,100 (half the total fee of $8,200
for The National Citizen SurveyTM Basic Service).
I understand that the first step in the survey process will be tailoring the survey instrument and choosing options
for survey administration--some of these options may entail additional fees. Once National Research Center has
received my payment, The National Citizen SurveyTM will begin.
If---for any reason--my jurisdiction decides not to enroll after it receives the invoice, I understand that I can call
ICMA to void the invoice.
__ NO, my jurisdiction is not quite ready to enroll. But I would like an ICMA or National Research Center
representative to contact me to discuss The National Citizen SurveyTM service.
Thank you for your interest in The National Citizen Survey=!
Name
Position
Organization
Address '~
Ci.ty State Zip
E-mail Address Phone
Fax or mail this form to: The NCSTM, ICMA, 777 North Capitol St., NE, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20002-
4201; fax 202-962-3500. For more information, e-mail: ncs@icma.org.
MelTIO
To: City Commission
From: David Harden ~t'/'I
CC:
Date: October 8, 2004
Re: City Recognition and Gifts Policy
At the June work session the Commission discussed and generally agreed on policies
regarding awarding of Keys to the City, Proclamations and other forms of recognition. The
attached written policy incorporates the direction given at the June work session, as
understood by the staff, and establishes procedures to be followed in applying this policy.
Recommendation: The Commission is requested to review the written policy and reach a
consensus on any needed changes. The final policy can then be put on next week's agenda
for formal approval.
CITY RECOGNITION AND GIFTS POLICY
Purpose:
The purpose of this policy is to set forth the guidelines for presentation by the City
Commission of Keys to the City, proclamations, certificates of appreciation and other
gifts and mementos to organizations, citizens, visitors, or employees for outstanding
service to the City of Delray Beach.
Policy:
The City Manager's Office will keep a supply of Keys to the City, Proclamations, Special
Recognition Awards, and other gifts and mementos for presentation to citizens,
organizations, visitors or employees to give them full public recognition of the honor they
bring to themselves and the community.
Key to the City - Awarding a Key to the City is the highest honor which the Mayor and
City Commission can bestow upon an individual and/or an organization. Keys will
typically be presented to honor outstanding service by citizens and dignitaries or elected
officials visiting the community as a token of friendship, esteem and recognition for their
distinguished service to mankind. Recommendations of individuals and/or an
organization to be honored with a Key to the City shall be placed on the Consent Agenda
for approval by the Commission. When a Key to the City is presented to an individual
outside of a Commission Meeting, it should be presented by the Mayor, Vice-Mayor or
another Commissioner if possible.
Proclamations - These recognize long standing employees, businesses and organizations
that provide exceptional service to the community, and noteworthy events that occur on
specific dates, weeks or months. Proclamations requested by City Commissioners will be
presented to the Mayor by the City Manager's Office for signature.
Special Recognition Awards - Such awards recognize outstanding individual
achievements and are to be signed by the Mayor. Recommendations for Special
Recognition Awards shall be placed on the Consent Agenda. This award may be
presented to individuals under any of the following circumstances:
A. Citizens whose actions exemplify excellence in performance of civic
responsibilities, showing unselfish devotion to their fellow humans and
community, and/or bring honor to themselves and recognition to the City through
their actions.
B. Employees whose actions or community involvement bring positive recognition
to their Department or to the City.
Other City gifts and mementos - City Commission members, while attending local or out-
of-town conference or meetings as a City representative may distribute gifts, pins and
other City recognition items. The City Manager, Assistant City Managers, or other
designee may also distribute these City recognition items if so directed.
Procedure:
Staff in the City Manager's Office is responsible for administering the policy on City
recognition awards and shall suggest the appropriate type of recognition.
A recognition request must include the presentation date, properly spelled name(s) of
recipient(s), and the exact wording for the key to the city, proclamation or certificate.
Department heads who wish to have a proclamation or certificate presented at a City
Commission meeting must submit their request(s) in writing to the City Manager.
If the key to the city, proclamation or certificate is to be presented at a City Commission
meeting, the City Manager's Office is responsible for placing the presentation on the
agenda through the agenda coordinator in the City Clerk's Office.
The City will maintain a variety of gifts and mementos for visitors and dignitaries as
selected and directed by the City Commission. Staff in the City Manager's Office will
purchase and maintain the inventory of such gifts.